I’m no expert but I don’t think it works that way. Best you can do is rely on old school techniques to improve fuel consumption.
I have the 204 as well and I was initially disappointed with poor mpg. The MFD showed 32mpg as the long term fuel consumption, driven by the previous owner in London.
I live and travel in a less built up area. I’m reliably getting 38 or so now on short journeys, day to day. Careful driving.
On a long journey last week, MFD was saying 45mpg+. This is at 55-65 mph on the motorway.
A remap won’t restrict your power or torque, but may provide some additional efficiency. Probably not substantial though.
My view is that any saving in fuel costs would be small and could take a very long time to repay the remap costs, depending on how many miles you drive per month. You don't say what your real world MPG figures are (rather than what the display figure says) so it's hard to know if your MPG is unusually poor.
Instead I'd try only using three quarters of the ponies you've got!
The 199 and 150 are totally different engines. The 199 is Biturbo for a start.
@Skyliner33 thats all well and good to someone who knows this and what it means
But me I just drive them
The 150 will have 1 turbo. As against a biturbo (2). So basically it’s not just a map that is the difference.
@Skyliner33 ok I guess
@Andyman. From all I've read on here the answer to your problem is either just suck it up or drive like a granny when she's having a particularly slow day. T6s and 6.1s just seem to be poor on fuel consumption (and that includes my 150). Of course, somebody will be along soon to contradict me and say that they regularly get in the mid 40s for MPG but, personally, I'm sceptical...
Deleted Member
Account closed by request
I average 22ish on my 204, so count yourself lucky 
I’ve owned a few different VWs. My ’05 Golf consumption is always 8-10 mpg lower than the MFD would show. My ’16 Touran is usually 5 mpg lower than the MFD.
So far, the Transporter is far closer to the consumption indicated on the MFD. My most recent fill-ups with mixed driving city/motorway, I’ve got 33.6 and 37.8, nearly exactly what the ave mpg was on the MFD. Warmer weather seems to be helping, too.
I’m looking forward to seeing the mpg on my next fill up, with the MFD suggesting nearly 45mpg.
… and I’ll cover my eyes once the full camper is fitted… I’m sure it’ll drop.
*And to be clear, I really am a slow-ass driver.
So far, the Transporter is far closer to the consumption indicated on the MFD. My most recent fill-ups with mixed driving city/motorway, I’ve got 33.6 and 37.8, nearly exactly what the ave mpg was on the MFD. Warmer weather seems to be helping, too.
I’m looking forward to seeing the mpg on my next fill up, with the MFD suggesting nearly 45mpg.
… and I’ll cover my eyes once the full camper is fitted… I’m sure it’ll drop.
*And to be clear, I really am a slow-ass driver.
The only fuel consumption benefit of cruise control is to stop your speed from creeping up. It can't read the road ahead, even ACC reacts to situations far later than your eyes and a gentle right foot will.
Driving using hypermiling techniques may save you a little bit of fuel, but it's a van and you are having to overcome aerodynamics, so it's never going to be brilliant. Just enjoy it. You might be paying more at the pumps, but the chances are you'll get much more when you come to trade it in. I've got builders with Vivaro's and the like. They say they'd never have VW's because they are too expensive and crap on fuel, but are quite happy to loose nearly all of it's value in 3 years.
Driving using hypermiling techniques may save you a little bit of fuel, but it's a van and you are having to overcome aerodynamics, so it's never going to be brilliant. Just enjoy it. You might be paying more at the pumps, but the chances are you'll get much more when you come to trade it in. I've got builders with Vivaro's and the like. They say they'd never have VW's because they are too expensive and crap on fuel, but are quite happy to loose nearly all of it's value in 3 years.
Are the petrol engines really meant to use so much fuel?
1. I've always got around 400-500kg of racking, tools and equipment on board.
2. 95% urban use in and around Sheffield (hilly) with lots of short journeys.
3. I don't drive with much thought to fuel efficiency.
4. Remapped to 300bhp, which gets put to use often.
Considering the above I don't think I do bad and quite frankly, I'm happy to pay the price for what I get from the van, it puts a smile on my face every day, I don't have to worry about a few of the problems which can affect modern diesels and in reality it costs a negligible amount more to run than the Transit it replaced.
Last edited:
Haha. Fair enough!
Similar threads
